Lancaster UAF: fanatics at work

Lancaster UAF have produced two pieces of hysteria in recent days. Pretty much every blog on the site is twisted and misleading in some way but I will focus on just two articles. The first is a piece on the “No platform” policy of the far left and the appearance at the Oxford Union by Nick Griffin and David Irving.

The former article states that ‘no platform’ has “worked” for the far left, the OU should not have been allowed to let the duo appear and the head of OU is “naive”.

I sent a reply to the site but as always, it was rejected so I’ll place it here:

Raging hypocrisy as usual. You say some views should “not be allowed”. Tell me, who in the world gave YOU or YOUR GROUP the power to decide what should “not be allowed”? Who bestowed that almighty power upon your shoulders?

“Extreme” is in the eye of the beholder. Most Communist or fascist governments defined as “extreme” or “hateful” any policy that questioned their power to do exactly as they liked. Dissenters were often tortured then killed.

You (UAF and affiliates) lobbied and intimidated the OU members, and when the members stood tall and made a democratic decision to invite Griffin and Irving to their private club, you resorted to physically intimidating them, abusing them and blocking the entrance for members. Disgusting.

If the BNP views are as “bad” as you say then why not let them debate? Surely they would be easy pickings and you would want them world to see them exposed?

You claim to be anti fascist but you scream “censor” at anyone who disagrees with your views or stands up for free speech. I’m sorry to break it to you, but free speech includes the right to say something you do not like, and you cannot pick and choose who to censor. The fact that you do just that shows us who the real fascists are.

I gladly challenge anyone on your forum to a sensible debate on a neutral site. I say that free speech applies for everyone. Of course nobody will accept and you will not publish my comment. The truth hurts.

The second article concerns the immolation of a woman in France. This tragic event appears to be provoked by a mental illness. My heart goes out to this woman’s family. Sadly, Lancaster UAF have chosen to use this death (three years later) as propaganda. They quote a few foolish comments from Stormfront, a Nazi site that has no connection with the BNP whatsoever.

The LUAF article tries to link the BNP to the nasty comments by saying “Stormfront is popular with the BNP”. This blatant lie is quickly glossed over with hysteria to quickly embed the idea of “Stormfront=BNP” in the mind of an uninformed reader.

Note that the vast majority of the comments and quotes on the articles are anonymous. It’s almost as if they were made up.

Perhaps there are one or two BNP members that visit the site in the same way that one or two Communists are criminals and more than two Lib Dem MPs have been registered as sex offenders. It is not condoned or supported by the party.

Immoral? Yes. Totally untrue? Sure. Hysterical? Certainly. But UAF do not care about facts, fairness or respectable journalism. They care about their own fanatical cause: fascism.

2 Responses to “Lancaster UAF: fanatics at work”

As a Neo-Nazi skinhead, I find it laughable that you, 1. call Stormfront a Neo-Nazi website, and 2. think that the BNP is clean of all Neo-Nazi ties. They are waist deep in trying to forge connections with various white nationalist (Stormfront, Euro, Etc.) and Neo-nazi (WCOTC, WAR, National Alliance, etc.) organizations. They like to pretend they are totally separate because they are under the delusion that you can effect a change through open political channels. They used Neo-Nazi skinheads as security for years and years, only in the last few years, in a desperate attempt to pretend they are something they are not, have they moved away from that practice. Stormfront is exactly the same sort of “vote your way out of this mess” chowder heads as the BNP. They are not Neo-nazis, but nor are they mainstream conservatives. All they manage is to be wonderfully half-assed at both. How do you call a site that deletes posts using racial slurs Neo-nazi? Just trying to balance out your info.

Hi, thanks for the comment. I don’t know a great deal about Stormfront so I’ll take your word on that side of things. As for the BNP, I didn’t say they were “clean of all ties” but my experience of the BNP has never bought me into contact with any Neo Nazis. There may be some, just like there are some ex-Communists in Labour, but they are not what the party wants or is about. With all the success of the BNP in recent times (compared to before) why would they want to forge ties with parties that do not match their democratic style?
BNP members are warned off Redwatch and warned off engaging in violence, not just publicly but also in private. I may be wrong but isn’t that a different code of conduct for Neo Nazis?